Sei sulla pagina 1di 156

STATIC LOAD TEST – A COMPARISON OF ULTIMATE LOAD BETWEEN STATNAMIC AND MAINTAINED LOAD TEST

MASTURA BINTI AZMI

A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of degree of Master of Engineering (Civil-Geotechnic)

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

MEI 2005

I hereby declare that I have read this thesis and in my opinion this thesis is sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Civil- Geotechnic)

Signature Name of Supervisor Date

: …………………………………………… : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Khairul Anuar b. Kassim : ……………………………………………

I declare that this thesis entitled “Static Load Test- A Comparison of Ultimate Load between Statnamic and Maintained Load Test” is the result of my own research except as cited in references. The thesis has not been accepted for any degree and concurrently submitted in candidature of any other degree.

Signature : …………………………………………….

Name:

Mastura Binti Azmi

Date :

26 May 2005

To everybody,

thank you so much

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Through my preparation for this project, I have met several people that gave a lot of contribution towards this study. Many thanks to Dr. Khairul Anuar b Kassim who has been supervised me throughout this study and thank you for all the knowledge that you gave to me. I would also like to forward my thought to Mr. Tan Hui Hock of Geonamics Sdn. Bhd. who has been providing me with the necessary information for this study. I would also like to express my appreciation to Mr. Liu Chong Yew of SPYTL who has been a great mentor to me. Without the support from these people the thesis would not finish as this.

My sincere appreciation should also go to the people’s incharge of the projects that I went to get my data and information. All the information are valuable for this thesis and many thanks to you. I would also like to thank all the people involve directly or indirectly in this thesis. Not to forget my family and friends.

ABSTRACT

This study is conducted to give a good comparison of the ultimate load between the statnamic load test and the maintained load test. The study was done using three methods to predict the ultimate load of statnamic load test. The three methods are the Unloading Point Method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method. The statnamic and maintained load test was done on two types of bored pile that are bored pile cast on limestone rock and bored pile cast on granite rock. The result shown in the study gave a different outcome. From the settlement-load curves derived, the result for the comparison of statnamic and maintained load test for bored pile cast on limestone gave an almost similar result. Thus, it can be said that the result for both statnamic and maintained load test can be used to determine the ultimate capacity of the pile. Where else, the result for bored pile cast on granite rock gave a very large difference due to large difference of length for the two bored pile. Therefore, it can be conclude that the result for this study on comparison of statnamic load test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on granite can not be used.

ABSTRAK

Projek ini dijalankan untuk memcari perbandingan kekuatan maksima di antara ujian beban statnamic dan ujian beban tertahan. Projek ini dijalankan menggunakan 3 kaedah berbeza bagi menentukan beban maksima dari ujian beban statnamic. 3 kaedah itu adalah kaedah pembebanan titik, kaedah Matsumoto dan kaedah penyelesaian persamaan serentak. Ujian statnamic dan beban tertahan telah dilakukan ke atas dua jenis bored pile iaitu cerucuk yang ditanam di atas batuan kapur dan di atas batuan granit. Ujian telah memberikan keputusan yang berbeza. Bagi keputusan ujian statnamic dan beban tertahan ke atas cerucuk di atas batuan kapur memberikan hasil yang lebih kurang sama tetapi bagi cerucuk yang terletak di atas batuan granit tidak. Ini berkemungkinan di sebabkan oleh perbezaan kedalaman yang sangat ketara. Oleh itu, bolehlah dikatakan bahawa perbandingan bagi ujian statnamic dan ujian beban tertahan bagi cerucuk yang dikorek di atas batuan granit bagi projek adalah gagal dan tidak boleh dibandingkan.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

TITLE

PAGE

ORGANISATION OF THESIS Thesis Status Declaration Declaration Supervisor’s declaration Declaration of originality

ii

Dedication

iii

Acknowledgement

iv

Abstract

v

Abstrak

vi

Table of Content

vii

List of Tables

xi

List of Figures

xii

1

INTRODUCTION

1

1.1 Objectives

2

1.2 Scopes

2

1.3 Problem Statement

3

2

LITERATURE REVIEW

5

2.1 Site Investigation

6

2.1.1 Planning

6

2.1.2 Depth of Exploration

7

2.1.3 Groundwater Condition

7

2.1.4 Sampling, in-situ testing and lab testing

8

2.2 Basic Piling Methods

10

2.2.1 Pile Types

10

2.2.1.1

Non-displacement piles

11

2.2.1.1.1 Bored cast-in-place

12

2.2.1.1.2 Small-diameter Percussion bored-cast- In-situ piles

13

2.2.1.1.3 Large-diameter Percussion bored pile 14

2.2.1.1.4 Rotary bored cast-in

 

-place pile

15

 

2.2.1.2 Pile formation with rotary Boring equipment

17

2.2.1.3 Boring and Concreting

18

2.2.2 Concrete mixes for bored piles

19

2.2.3 Reinforcement for bored piles

21

2.2.4 Excavation using a bentonite suspension

21

2.3 Pile Testing

 

22

2.3.1

Introduction

22

2.4 Load Testing of Piles

24

2.4.1 General

 

24

2.4.2 Test equipment

25

2.4.3 Load application and measurement

26

 

2.4.3.1

Measurement of settlement

27

2.5 Pile Load Test Procedure

27

2.5.1

Maintained load test

28

2.6 Interpretation of the results

29

2.6.1

Load-settlement curves

29

2.6.3

Settlement criteria

30

2.7 Statnamic test

31

2.7.1 Introduction

31

2.7.2 Development of statnamic

33

2.7.3 Basic concept of statnamic

33

2.7.4 Application of statnamic test

35

2.7.5 Statnamic theory

36

2.7.5.1 Load duration

36

2.8 Stress Wave Analysis

37

2.9 Pyrotechnics

38

2.10 Data Acquisition

40

2.11 Statnamic Assembly

41

2.12 The Result

43

2.13 Statnamic compared to dynamic and static loading

43

2.13.1 Dynamic testing

43

2.13.2 Static Testing

44

2.14 Soil Types

44

2.14.1

Elementary rock classification

44

3.14.2

Stratigraphy

48

3.14.2

Hardness

48

3.14.3

Defects in rock

49

2.14.4

Uniaxial compressive strength

50

2.14.5

Rock mass classification

51

3

METHODOLOGY

52

3.1 Statnamic test

52

3.2 Assembly of statnamic test equipment

53

3.3 Data Acquisition

63

4 DATA ANALYSIS

64

4.1 Interpretation of statnamic pile load test results

64

4.1.1 Unloading point method

67

4.1.2 Matsumoto method

68

4.1.3 Simultaneous equation method

69

4.2 Interpretation of maintained load test data

70

5 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

71

5.1 Results for bored pile on limestone rock

71

5.2 Results for bored pile on granite rock

78

5.3 Conclusions

85

86

REFERENCES APPENDICES Appendix 1

89

Appendix 2

91

Appendix 3

93

Appendix 4

100

Appendix 5

114

Appendix 6

128

Appendix 7

135

Appendix 8

142

Appendix 9

157

Appendix 10

172

LIST OF TABLES

TABLES NO

TITLE

PAGE

2.1

Typical in-situ tests and their application to pile design

9

2.2

Recommended concrete slumps for cast- in- place pile

20

2.3

Schematic classification of igneous rock

45

2.4

Schematic classification of sedimentary rocks

47

2.5

Rock quality

51

5.1

Results for the statnamic test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on limestone rock

72

5.2

Results for the statnamic test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on granite rock

78

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURES

NO

TITLE

PAGE

2.1

The unloading-point model

38

2.2

Statnamic devices assembly

42

3.1

Installation of piston and oil application

54

3.2

Piston and oil installation

54

3.3

Ignition system

55

3.4

Fuel cage

55

3.5

Loading of statnamic fuel

56

3.6

Closing of the piston

56

3.7

Installation of base plate

57

3.8

Installation of cylinder

57

3.9

Installation of cylinder

58

3.10

Installation of weight

58

3.11

Installation of weight

59

3.12

Installation of weight

59

3.13

After installation of weight mass

60

3.14

Placing the gravel structure non-supporting panels

60

3.15

Closing of the structure panels and installation of gravel

61

3.16

Portable computer and data logging device

61

3.17

Cell laser source

62

3.18

After testing

62

4.1

Modelling of pie and soil during statnamic loading

5.1

Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Limestone rock

73

5.2

Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Limestone rock

74

5.3

Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Limestone rock

75

5.4

Results for maintained load test for Limestone rock

76

5.5

Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (3 rd cycle) for Limestone rock

77

5.6

Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Granite rock

80

5.7

Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Granite rock

81

5.8

Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Granite rock

82

5.9

Results for maintained load test for Granite rock

83

5.10

Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (2 nd cycle) for Granite rock

84

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURES

NO

TITLE

PAGE

2.1

The unloading-point model

38

2.2

Statnamic devices assembly

42

3.1

Installation of piston and oil application

54

3.2

Piston and oil installation

54

3.3

Ignition system

55

3.4

Fuel cage

55

3.5

Loading of statnamic fuel

56

3.6

Closing of the piston

56

3.7

Installation of base plate

57

3.8

Installation of cylinder

57

3.9

Installation of cylinder

58

3.10

Installation of weight

58

3.11

Installation of weight

59

3.12

Installation of weight

59

3.13

After installation of weight mass

60

3.14

Placing the gravel structure non-supporting panels

60

3.15

Closing of the structure panels and installation of gravel

61

3.16

Portable computer and data logging device

61

3.17

Cell laser source

62

3.18

After testing

62

4.1

Modelling of pie and soil during statnamic loading

5.1

Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Limestone rock

73

5.4

Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Limestone rock

74

5.5

Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Limestone rock

75

5.4

Results for maintained load test for Limestone rock

76

5.5

Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (3 rd cycle) for Limestone rock

77

5.9

Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Granite rock

80

5.10

Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Granite rock

81

5.11

Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Granite rock

82

5.9

Results for maintained load test for Granite rock

83

5.10

Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (2 nd cycle) for Granite rock

84

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In every construction, foundation is one of the vital component that need a lot of attention whether in design or in construction. Choosing the correct foundation for a certain project is important to ensure a stable and longer life span of the structure. History shows that the usage of foundation in a structure is not new as it has been long use since man starts built a structure. Until now, there are a lot of efforts to increase the potency of foundation. This effort can also be seen with the introduction of variety of testing that would be suitable to see the effectiveness of foundation use. One of the study use in foundation especially pile foundation is static loading. There are several tests that can be used including statnamic load testing. This method is not new in construction engineering and been used in the west countries since 1988. The Statnamic test has now gained some attention in local construction since it has been used in 1994. Therefore, a study is needed in ensuring that this test can be used effectively in our construction industry

2

1.1 Objectives

The objectives that would be achieved in this study are:

i. The advantages and the disadvantages of the statnamic load test compared to the ordinary maintained load test.

ii. A comparison between the statnamic loading test and the typical maintained load test based on the settlement result and the ultimate bearing capacity of pile.

iii. A comparison between the statnamic load test and the maintained load test based on different types of soils.

1.2 Scopes

The scopes of this study are:

i. To compare statnamic test result on bored pile size 750mm diameter with maintained load test result on bored pile size 1050mm diameter cast on limestone rock.

ii. To compare the statnamic test result and maintained load test result on bored pile cast on limestone rock based on three methods of calculation (Unloading Point method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method).

3

iii. To compare statnamic test result on bored pile size 1800mm diameter with maintained load test result on bored pile size 1200mm diameter cast on granite rock.

iv. To compare the statnamic test result and maintained load test result on bored pile cast on granite rock based on three methods of calculation (Unloading Point method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method).

1.3 Problem statement

Although the usage of foundation especially the pile foundation is not new in the construction industry the people still not satisfy with the outcome of it. The introduction of latest testing devices shows that people still trying to find the most accurate way in predicting the pile behaviour. Typically several tests will be done for pile to show the integrity of the pile and its capacity. This prediction can ensure that the design of the pile meet the requirement needed for the use of the structure.

For capacity load testing of pile, several tests can be used in determining the pile capacity. The typical static load test that can show pile capacity and its settlement is the maintained load test or kentledge load test. This test gives an accurate result of the pile capacity and its settlement. Although this test gives a nearly perfect result of the pile behaviour but it does have several limitations such as long test time and it required a 24- hour close monitoring of the test.

In order to overcome this problem, several choices of tests that would give almost the same result as the ordinary maintained load test have been introduced

4

including the statnamic load test. This test has actually been used in the European countries since 1988 and has gained a lot of reputation on it. This statnamic load test already came to Malaysia in 1994 and has been used in a lot of projects in the country.

Although it has been almost 11 years since it been introduced here but there are least studies been carried out in comparing the statnamic load test to the ordinary maintained load test. Therefore, this study will be conducted to compare the statnamic load test to the ordinary maintained load test based on Malaysia condition.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

In each project, piling would be one of the essential parts that need to be monitored and carefully designed. There are several things that need to be included in choosing the right pile for the project. These include the site investigation of the project, the method of taking the sample of soil, the tests that related in determining the correct piling and the suitable choice of piling.

Based on Fuller (1983), under certain conditions, the inspection or engineering control of pile installations should be very comprehensive and cover all aspects from pile material to final installation, including equipment and pile load testing. In this literature review, the study will be focused in determining the suitable pile based on ground and fundamental study. Although the steps are almost the same for every construction but the procedure of choosing the correct piles would differ for each construction related to the soil condition and the purpose of each project. Therefore, in this literature review, an introduction on site investigation, types of pile and types of pile testing will be discussed.

6

2.1.1 Planning

The planning of a site investigation for piling works is essentially similar to that for shallow foundations, apart from the obvious requirement for greater depth of exploration. The main additional factors that should be considered are the practical aspects of pile installation.

Based on Fleming et al (1992), The first stage in planning a site investigation comprises a desk study of the available information. This subject is comprehensively discussed in BS 5930 (1981). The second stage should include a site inspection in order to confirm, as far as is possible, the data collected during the desk study, and to make as many additional preliminary observations as possible.

The investigation should take into account details of foundation design if known, including the tolerance of the structure to settlement, since this can dictate the extent of the investigation. Where these details are unknown it is important that the exploratory work provides sufficient information to permits decisions concerning the type of foundation, as well as the actual foundation design to be made. The major requirement of the investigation in terms of the design is to provide comprehensive information over the full depth of the propose foundations and well below any possible pile toe level. This is necessary to permit flexibility in the pile design and to be certain that the anticipated strata thickness exist.

7

Fleming et al (1992) tells that the extent of the exploration is not limited solely by the zone of influence caused by the loaded piles, but is depend on other factors such as considerations of general stability, the necessity to understand the overall groundwater regime, highly heterogeneous soil conditions or the effects of piling on adjacent structures. The zone of influence is a good starting point, since it quantifies to some degree the lateral and vertical extent of the stressed zone.

Where piles are to be founded in a bearing stratum of limited thickness (such as a gravel layer overlying clay) it is essential that the large number of bores or probing are employed – possibly spaced on a close grid, to determine whether the bearing stratum thickness and level is maintained over the proposed area of loading. In these cases, detailed exploration may be restricted to a limited number of locations, permitting the calibration of a lower cost penetration method, which may be used to provide the necessary coverage. It is important in this situation that the competence of the underlying stratum to sustain the transmitted stresses is established. Where piles are to be founded in a rock-bearing stratum, the likely variability of rock-head level should be assessed from a geological point of view and the investigation should be sufficient to establish rock-head contours in adequate detail and to obtain profiles strength and weathering.

2.1.3 Groundwater conditions

The investigation of groundwater conditions is particularly important to piling works. The findings may influence the choice of pile type and it is essential that the piling contractors has the data necessary to assess the rate of water inflow that may occur during the installation of conventional bored piles. Observations of the ingress of water including the levels at which water seeps and collects should be made and noted on the site investigation logs in such a way that they may be related to the casing and borehole depths. These water level observations

8

will be unlikely to reflect the true hydrostatic conditions, but the information is of use to piling contractors tendering for bored or drilled piles.

2.1.4 Sampling, in-situ testing and laboratory testing

In certain respects, decisions regarding the optimum program of sampling and testing may only be made after some knowledge of the ground conditions at the site has been gained, and some conclusions regarding the possible piling alternatives have been reached. This situation emphasizes the need for a flexible approach and the value of preliminary studies to facilitate the initial assessment. In many cases, the selection of a suitable pile type is controlled by external factors such as cost, vibration or noise level, and there is no simple way to relate pile type to the prevailing soil and groundwater conditions.

Fleming et al (1992) stated that some situations may arise where special tests may be required or the intensity of sampling or testing may have to be increased to provide sufficient data on particular aspects. Such an approach would be very much dependent on the costs involved in the additional exploration compared with the costs of deeper, or larger (possibly over-conservative) pile foundations. Table 2.1 summarizes typical in- situ tests, which can be carried out and their application to pile design.

In-situ test

Application to pile design

Vane test

For measurement of in-situ undrained strength in soft to firm clays. Results may be applied to the estimation of down drag on a pile shaft. The remolded strength of

9

Standard penetration test (SPT)

Static cone test

Pressuremeter

Stressprobe pressuremeter Plate bearing tests (over a range of depths)

Simple permeability tests

sensitive clays may be relevant to overall stability problems associated with pile driving in soft clays. Investigation of thickness of bearing strata. Direct application of N value in empirical formulae for pile load capacity. Estimation of the angle of friction φ′, in granular deposits, for use in pile design. Crude estimates of cohesions in stiff clays or matrix dominant fills. A tentative relationship between N value and modulus for use in pile/soil systems has been proposed. Direct application of sleeve friction and point resistance to the design of driven piles. Estimation of the shear strength of clays and production of detailed soil profiles. Estimates the modulus of soil for possible application in pile design, but results may not be strictly appropriate. Estimates of shear strength in weak rock. Gives a measure of the undrained shear strength of stiff clays and especially developed for over-water use. Gives shear strength and modulus in all soil types. The shear strength parameters are highly relevant to pile design, as similar volumes of soil stressed. For estimation of flow in permeable gravels or fissured rock. This may be a factor relevant to the selection of pile type. The tests can also be used in weak rock, to indicate highly fissured or fractured zones.

to the selection of pile type. The tests can also be used in weak rock, to
to the selection of pile type. The tests can also be used in weak rock, to
to the selection of pile type. The tests can also be used in weak rock, to
to the selection of pile type. The tests can also be used in weak rock, to

Table 2.1: Typical in-situ tests and their application to pile design

2.2 Basic piling methods

The two basic methods of installing piles are well known, namely driving them into the ground, or excavation of the ground, usually by boring, and filling the void with concrete. Typical of this type of development are methods, which involve the

10

combination of driven and bored techniques. To install these piles, a casing is driven into the ground, followed by in-situ concreting. Other more specialized techniques exist, such as the injection of grout into the ground. Within each category, variations exist associated with the particular proprietary method in use.

2.2.1 Pile types

Regarding to Fleming et al (1992), in order to categorize the various types of pile and their method of installation, a simple division into ‘driven’ or ‘bored’ piles is often employed. This is adequate in many situations, but does not satisfactorily cope with the many ‘hybrid’ types of pile in use. A more rigorous division into ‘displacement’ or ‘non- displacement’ piles overcomes this difficulty. In the displacement (generally driven) pile, soil is moved radially as the pile shaft enters the ground. There may also be a component of movement of the soil in the vertical direction. Granular soils tend to become compacted by the displacement process, and clay soils may heave, there being little immediate volume change as the clay is displaced.

Piles of relatively small cross-sectional area, such as ‘H’ section piles, are termed ‘low displacement piles’, and the effects of compaction or soil heave are reduced. This can be advantageous if long lengths of pile are to be driven through granular deposits, or if the piles are at close centers, or if clay heaves is a problem. If non-displacement (generally bored) pile, lateral stresses in the ground are reduced during excavation and only partly reinstated by concreting.

Fleming et al (1992) also stated that the displacement of the soil by a pile during installation is therefore a fundamental property, and its recognition in any classification of pile type is clearly advantageous. Little-used types such as screw piles can also be

11

covered by the (low) displacement classification, whereas they could not be correctly term ‘driven piles’. The two main categories of pile types may be classified further according to whether performed units are used, and whether the performed unit is used as temporary support for the ground and withdrawn during concreting. For non- displacement piles, factors such as pile diameter and under reaming are introduced to the classification, as they have a bearing on the method of installation, and particularly in the type of plant employed.

2.2.1.1 Non-displacement piles

Based on Fleming et al (1992), the excavation of a borehole in the ground, a pile can be produced by casting concrete in the void. Some soils, such as stiff clays, are particularly amenable to the information of piles in this way, since the borehole walls do not require support, except close to the ground. In unstable ground, such as gravels, the ground requires temporary support, from casing or bentonite slurry. Alternatively, the casing may be permanent, but driven into a hole which is bored as the casing is advanced. A different technique, which is still essentially non-displacement, is to intrude a grout or a concrete from an auger which is rotated into a granular soil, and hence produce a grouted column of soil. The three non-displacement methods are therefore

i. Bored cast-in-place piles

ii. Partially preformed piles

iii. Grout or concrete intruded piles

Particularly in pile types (i) and (ii), little or even negative soil displacement occurs during boring, and indeed, granular deposits may be loosened by the boring action. This is in contrast to a displacement pile, which produces (sometime beneficial) ground

12

compaction in granular deposits. On the other hand, the rough and irregular interface between the pile and the soil that is formed during the boring action tends to improve load transfer, and the difference in skin friction between the two types is less than it might be. In type (iii) the auger is usually made to run full throughout the process, and relaxation of the walls of the bore may be inhibited.

2.2.1.1.1 Bored cast-in-place piles

The range of pile sizes and hence design loads is considerable for this form of pile. The excavation process generally (but not exclusively) produces a borehole of circular cross-section, and piles are referred to as small-diameter when less than 600 mm, and large-diameter when greater than this nominal size. The smaller diameter piles tend to be bored by tripod rigs employing percussion methods, and larger size by rotary or percussive grabbing methods. Nominal diameters (mm) for bored piles are as follows:

i. 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, 600 (small-diameter)

ii. 750, 900, 2050, 1200, 1350, 1500, 1800, 2100 (large-diameter)

2.2.1.1.2 Small-diameter percussion bored cast-in-place piles

In this type of pile, the boreholes are formed by rigs that is similar to those employed for site investigation, using equivalent techniques. The tripods and equipment are heavier, however, and minimum pile diameters start at around 300 mm, which is

13

about the maximum for a site investigation borehole. The percussion tools and screwed casing are very similar. In cohesive soils, a ‘clay cutter’ is used, often weighted to improve penetration. Tripod rigs are light and easily transported and are therefore very suitable for work on small sites or amongst existing buildings, or even inside buildings. Short rigs can be used in limited headroom with a slight loss in efficiency. Very little site preparation is required. In granular soils, the possibility of removal of material from around the bore can lead to undermining of adjacent footings, and greater care is necessary. During boring for a pile the temporary casing may be advanced to considerable depths, and the single line pull of the winch is then inadequate to extract it.

In granular soils, a ‘shell’ is used for boring. This comprises a heavy tube with a flap valve at its base with an open top. The removal of soil by a shell relies on water being present. Dropping a shell into the a granular soil below the water table causes the flap at the base to open, the flap closing as the shell is raised. Spoil from the shelling action is simply tipped out at the surface by up-ending the shell. There is a danger during shelling that the soil may be over-loosened and material drawn from the sides of the bore, and in extreme cases, the shell may become buried below the casing. To prevent this over-break, the temporary casing should be advanced by driving it into the ground as the borehole advances.

With a long length of heavy casing in loose sandy gravels, it is possible for rapid shelling action to so loosen the ground that the casing falls under its own weight. Whilst rapid progress is achieved, there is always a risk of over-break by this means, and the ground is loosened around the bore to a significant degree. It is important that a positive head of water is kept in the pile bore when boring through granular deposits to minimize the loosening effect, and to prevent piping up the pile bore. Water may have to be added in order to achieve this.

14

2.2.1.1.3 Large-diameter percussion bored piles

Fleming et al (1992) stated that, large-diameter percussion bored piling equipment is well suited to the penetration of hard strata, which may include weak sedimentary rock. Where casing is advanced as the drilling proceeds, as with Benoto system, unstable strata are supported and may be interspersed with harder strata. Semi- rotary down-hole percussive hammer rigs, of the type used for well boring are now available in sizes which approached those of large-diameter piles. This equipment does not handle casing, and a separate reaming and casing operation may be necessary using an attendant auger rig. However, the plant will bore through weak rock with little difficulty and in certain circumstances may be suitable for forming deep rock sockets for example.

The boring machine is mounted on a wheeled or skid-equipped chassis and employs an oscillatory drive to achieve casing penetration. The casing is sectional, but because of the semi-rotary driving action, is not screwed together, but employs a flush quick-action circumferential joint within the twin-walled casing thickness. The boring tube has a hardened cutting edge and is hydraulically clamped in a collar which transmits the semi-rotary action and vertical motion provided by hydraulic rams. Other impact equipment can be used to break through particularly hard ground. The ability of the machine to penetrate hard ground makes it especially suitable for secant piled walls, in which each pile overlaps its neighbour by about 10% of the pile diameter. The piles are reinforced and concreted in the usual way, the casing being hydraulically jacked out of the ground during concreting. Piles up to around 40 m in length can be formed at a rake of up to 1 in 5, although in some ground conditions the full depth may not be possible. Working loads are 200 to 500 tones in suitable ground for pile diameters of between 670 and 1200 mm respectively.

15

2.2.1.1.4 Rotary bored cast-in-place piles

The majority of large-diameter piles are bored using rotary methods, generally by augers in the UK, although in other parts of the world, such as the US, large-diameter drilling plant is more commonly used to construct ‘caisson’ piles.

The augering plant is usually crane- or lorry-mounted, with a power pack to drive a ring gear within a rotary drilling table which is fixed to the crane base. The main advantage of lorry-mounted rigs is the ease of transport between sites, but this is at the expense of maneuverability on confined sites. The crane-mounted rigs are costly to transport, but are better able to move between pile positions on uneven sites. A number of manufacturers produce complete rotary boring rigs, such as Bachy Bauer, Soilmec, BSP or Casagrande. Other companies offer crane attachments, for fitting to a standard machine.

In operation, the auger is driven from the ring gear at the drilling table via a sliding square or keyed circular sectioned Kelly bar, which may be telescopic for deep boreholes. The auger and Kelly bar are suspended from the crane winch rope. An attendant crane is generally necessary for handling temporary casing, except with some specially developed rigs, usually for the smaller diameter piles, which can handle the casing from a second winch line and double cathead.

The usual crane-mounted auger will bore to a diameter of at least 3000 mm. Depths of boring vary from around 25 m from cased auger rigs to as much as 60 m for the larger crane-based auger rigs, with telescopic, triple extension Kelly bars. Typical design loads vary from 1 to 20 MN, in suitable ground conditions.

16

Special feature of auger bored piles which is sometimes used is the underream, which enables the bearing capacity of suitable strata to be exploited by providing an enlarged base. The soil has to be capable of standing open unsupported to employ this technique, and stiff to hard clays, such as the London clay, are ideal. For large-diameter deep drilling of pile bores in weak sedimentary rocks augers may not be suitable, and a core barrel or rock roller bit is employed. High capacity drilling tables are mounted on heavy base cranes, and air or direct circulation water flush drilling employed.

Core barrels are fitted with a calyx basket to collect cuttings above the core barrel and have tungsten carbide cutting bits. Core barrels are typically up to 2 m in diameter, and rock rollers in excess of 3 m are available, although these large sizes are rarely used.

2.2.1.2 Pile formation with rotary boring equipment

The upper portion of a pile bore is likely to be in loose or weak ground, and some form of temporary support is then necessary. It is usual for a steel casing to be employed for this, even when the remainder of the bore is made under the stabilizing action of a bentonite suspension. The temporary casing also seals off water below the water table in permeable ground.

Shallow, dry, granular deposits are loosened by the auger, and will generally stand open long enough for a short length of casing to be inserted. To advance the bore further in granular soils, the auger can be used to loosen the soil, followed by driving the casing with a drop hammer. Alternatively, the casing can be advanced with a hydraulic casing vibrator suspended from the attendant crane. The process can be made more efficient in some instances by adding bentonite powder to the granular soil, and ‘mudding in’. Water may be also need to be added. The effect is to produce a column of

17

loosened soil with a stable-walled bore through which the casing can be driven more easily to depths of about 10 m. A casing vibrator can increase the depth of insertion to around 25 m. Casagrande casing oscillators provide an alternative means of installing casing. At the level of an impermeable soil, such as stiff clay, the casing can be forced into the ground to form a seal against entry of water by ‘crowding’ action. The ‘crowd’ force is applied via the Kelly bar by clamps gripping the casing and applying an axial thrust via retracting hydraulic rams against the reaction of the rig.

18

2.2.1.3 Boring and concreting

Concreting in ‘dry’ bores is usually a straightforward procedure. On completion of the borehole, the reinforcement is placed with suitable spacers to locate it centrally in the bore. When poring concrete in a dry vertical bore, a hopper and tube should be used to ensure that the mix is not directed towards the reinforcement. In raking piles, a chute may be required or a first charge of grout placed.

Any sudden drop in concrete level as the casing is withdrawn should be noted. This would probably indicate a zone of over-break; it is possible in certain circumstances for intermixing of soil, water and concrete to take place. This occurrence is sometimes accompanied by a loss or distortion of pile reinforcement, the steel cage being carried downwards and outwards at the overbreak zone. To prevent this, boring ahead of the pile casing in unstable ground should be avoided. It is often the casing-off of such zones overbreak that leads to conditions which produce contaminated concrete on the pile shaft – a feature sometimes mistakenly ascribed to the cross-flow of groundwater.

In weaker soils, it is possible for the fluid pressure of the wet concrete in the pile bore to fail the soil, and a slump occurs with a bulge in the pile shaft. A critical undrained cohesion of around 15 kN/m 2 has been observed to the result in this effect. The possibility of soil failure from this cause can be lessened by pulling the casing at a steady rate, rather than in short rapid pulls, and limiting the head of concrete in the casing, provided this can be done without risk of the concrete slumping below the bottom of the casing in the bore.

19

2.2.1.3.1 Boring and concreting in water-bearing ground

In stratigraphic succession in which water-bearing gravel overlies stiff clay, the temporary casing is used to support the borehole through the gravel, and is then driven a short distance into the clay in order to seal off the water. Boring then continues under dry conditions. This may not always be possible, and the base of the pile may be in granular deposit below the water table. The tremie method of concreting is then employed. This is the practical method of forming a pile shaft provided certain precautions are taken. It is essential that a total collapse slump mix is used (greater than 175mm), and that the tremie pipe is always well below the water/concrete interface during the concreting. The tremie pipe and hopper connections should be watertight and in clean condition to permit free flow of the concrete. A minimum internal diameter for the tremie pipe of 150mm is suggested for use with concrete having maximum aggregate size of 20mm, increasing for larger aggregates.

2.2.2 Concrete mixes for bored piles

The integrity of the pile shaft is of paramount importance, and the concreting mixes and methods that have evolved for bored piles are directed towards this, as opposed to the high-strength concrete necessary for pre-cast piles or structural work above ground.

Based on Fleming et al (1992), this prerequisite has led to the adoption of highly workable mixes, and the total collapse mix for tremied piles has been mentioned. In order to ensure that the concrete flows between the reinforcing bars to ease, and into the interstices of the soil, a high-slump, self-compacting mix is called for. Minimum cement

20

content of 300 kg/m 3 is generally employed, increasing to 400 kg/m 3 at slumps greater than 150mm, with a corresponding increase in fine aggregate content to maintain the cohesion of the mix. Three mixes recommended by the Federation of Piling Specialists are given in Table 2.2

Piling mix

Typical slump

Conditions of use

(mm)

A

125

Poured into water-free unlined bore. Widely spaced leaving ample room for free movement of concrete between bars.

B

150

Where reinforcement is not spaced widely enough to give free movement of concrete between bars. Where cut- off level of concrete is within casing. Where pile diameter is < 600 mm.

C

> 175

Where concrete is to be placed by tremie under water or bentonite in slurry.

Table 2.2: Recommended concrete slumps for cast-in-place piles

21

2.2.3 Reinforcement for bored piles

For piles loaded in compression alone, it is only necessary to reinforce the shaft to a depth of 2m greater than the depth of temporary casing, to prevent any tendency for concrete lifting when pulling the casing. Piles subject to tension or lateral forces and eccentric loading (possibly by being out of position or out of plumb) require suitable reinforcement designed to cope with these forces. Nominal reinforcement for piles in compression only would comprise say four 12mm diameter bars for a 400mm diameter pile to five 16mm diameter bars for a 550mm diameter pile. A special cage of 5mm steel, or hoops of flat steel, is employed as lateral ties. The assembled cage should be sufficiently strong to sustain lifting and lowering into the pile bore without permanent distortion or displacement of bars. Bars should not be so densely packed that concrete aggregate cannot pass freely between them, and hoop reinforcement is not recommended at closer than 100mm centers. It is frequently necessary to lap bars in long piles, and it is here that trouble can arise, with aggregate blocking at the laps and preventing concrete flowing to the boreholes walls.

2.2.4 Excavation using a bentonite suspension

A method of borehole wall support developed from slurry trench techniques is the use of a bentonite suspension. Where pile bores are required to penetrate considerable depths of unstable soil, the installation of long lengths of temporary casing is a time-consuming process.

Fleming et al (1992) stated that by employing a bentonite suspension of around 6% by weight bentonite, the borehole walls may be effectively supported, provided there

22

is a positive head of bentonite slurry above the groundwater table of at least 1.5m. in permeable granular soils, there is an initial flow of slurry into the borehole wall, where a ‘filter cake’ rapidly builds up which then prevents further flow, and the excess hydrostatic pressure in the borehole supports the ground. An additional benefit is the holding in suspension of fine detritus from the boring operations.

Concreting is carried out by the tremie method, using concrete with a slump in excess of 175mm. With clean bentonite slurry in the bore, the suspension is effectively scoured and displaced by the fluid concrete. No decrease in pile adhesion has been observed in properly constructed bentonite piles, whether the shafts are in granular soils or cohesive clays.

2.3

Pile testing

2.3.1

Introduction

Load testing of piles is expensive, and the cost should be carefully weighted against the reduction in risk and assurance of satisfactory behaviour that the pile test provides. It is not easy for the engineer to be assured that the piled foundations comply with the specifications and drawings. It goes without saying that a comprehensive site investigation is essential.

The pile test program should be considered as part of the design and construction process, and not carried out hurriedly in response to an immediate construction problem. Pile tests may be performed at various stage of construction; prior at the contract and during construction. Pre-contract piles may be installed and tested to prove the

23

suitability of the piling system and to confirm the design parameters inferred from the site investigation. It is common practice not to test piles immediately after placing but to satisfy a delay of perhaps 1 to 3 weeks or even more, depending on soil type and experience.

Testing of contract piles may involve integrity testing to check the construction technique and workmanship and for load testing to confirm the performance of the pile as a foundation element. Pile testing may range from ‘spot checks’ on pile quality to comprehensively instrumented piles bordering on a research exercise.

There are two main aspects of the pile quality to be considered:

i. The integrity of the pile and its ability to carry the applied loading as a structural unit

ii. The load bearing and deformation characteristics of the soil/pile system

It is stressed that any piles test program should be carefully designed, and that the purpose of each test should be clearly stated. A large amount of information can be obtained from carefully conducted and instrumental test piles. The information may well lead to refinements of the foundation design with a consequent possible cost saving, or certainly greater assurance of the satisfactory performance of the foundation. On the other hand, poor-quality test pile data may lead to an uneconomic design and are obviously wasteful of resources and money.

24

2.4

Load testing of piles

2.4.1

General

Pile load testing, using the maintained load or the constant rate of penetration test procedures, is the most commonly adopted method of checking the performance of a pile. Any pile testing and loading system should be properly designed, bearing in mind the large forces and high strain energy in the system under full load. The test pile should be typical in all respects of the piles in the foundation. Pile testing requires some considerable time and engineering input to carry out and to interpret the results; this process should not be rushed at the expense of quality of the data and reliability of the results.

The objectives of a preliminary pile test program are usually to determine:

i. The ultimate bearing capacity of the piles, relating this to the design parameters

ii. To separate the pile resistance contributed by the adhesion and end bearing capacity

iii. To determine the stiffness of the soil/pile system at design load. A back analysis of this data will enable the soil modulus to be evaluated, and hence the deformation of pile groups may be predicted with greatly increased confidence

25

2.4.2 Test equipment

The ultimate load of a pile may range from a few tens of tones to as much 2500 tones, and provision of a reaction to jack against requires careful consideration. The geometry of the pile-reaction arrangement should be such as to minimize interaction between the pile and the reaction, and to avoid movement of datum beams used as references to measure settlement.

Kentledge is commonly used to provide reaction, and more or less any material available in sufficient quantity can be used. Specially-cast concrete blocks or pigs of cast iron may be hired and transported to site. Sheet steel piling, steel rail, bricks, or tanks full of sand or water have to be adopted as kentledge from time to time. The important criterion is that the mass of material is stable at all times during and after the test.

Clearance is required above the pile cap for the jack, load cell and reaction beam, and it is necessary to support the whole weight of the kentledge on a timber or other appropriate cribbage should be sufficient to avoid bearing failure, a severe problem on soft ground. The kentledge is usually supported on a deck of steel beams and/or a timber mattress. The cribbage should also be spaced at 3 or 4 diameters from the pile to avoid an unacceptably large interaction as load is transferred to the pile. This spacing determines the minimum length of the reaction beam required.

The reaction beam is subjected to high bending and buckling stresses and it should be designed to carry the maximum load safely. The maximum safe load should be clearly marked on the beam so that it is not inadvertently exceeded during a test. A thick spreader plate is normally welded to the center of the beam to disperse the point load from the jack.

Tension piles may be utilized to provide a satisfactory reaction, particularly for raking piles. It is obviously most convenient if adjacent permanent piles can be used.

26

The top of the tension pile should be adequately reinforced against the stresses imposed by the anchors. The tension piles should be normally be reinforced for the full depth of the pile, though of course reinforcement in the pile may be curtailed as necessary with depth.

The tension forces may be transmitted to the cross-head using a looped cable and steel saddle, or individual wires in the cable may be locked separately in an anchor block. Owing to the high extensibility of the wires, very large amounts of energy are stored in the system, creating a potentially hazardous situation. Thus each component of the system should be designed and installed correctly.

2.4.3 Load application and measurement

Based on Fleming et al (1992), it is important that the application of the load to the test pile can be closely controlled, and a range of hydraulic jacks is readily available. Short, large-diameter low-pressure jacks are to be preferred to the high-pressure type as they are more stable. The jack may be actuated by a hand pump for loads up to approximately 300 tones. However, for very high loadings or constant rate of penetration tests, it is preferable to use a motorized pumping unit. Pressure gauges should be fitted to the system to allow the operator to check the load in the system at a glance, as he may be some way from the test pile.

Load measurement is preferably carried out using a load cell, and several types are readily available. Commonly adopted load measuring devices, in order of accuracy, are

i. Hydraulic load capsule, maximum capacity 450 tones

27

iii. Proving rings, maximum capacity 200 tones

iv. Strain gauged load cells of various types, maximum capacity 200 tones

2.4.3.1 Measurement of settlement

The measurement of deformation is perhaps the most difficult observation to make reliably. The use of dial gauges calibrated in 0.01 mm may give a false sense of accuracy to the observations. In practice, measurement to this precision is not necessary for pile testing and it is extremely difficult to maintain this degree of accuracy over a long period of time. The most commonly used systems of settlement measurement are dial test indicators or optical leveling.

2.5 Pile load test procedures

Two types of pile load test are commonly carried out; the maintained load test and the constant rate of penetration test. The maintained load test is convenient for testing end-bearing piles and for determining the load/settlement characteristics in clay soils. Usually, however, it is not as suitable for determining the true ultimate capacity of a pile.

The constant rate of penetration test procedure is best suited to determining the ultimate bearing capacity of a pile, as the method of testing is closely related to the test

28

procedures used to obtain the shear strength of the soil. In clay soils, rapid pile testing may approximate to undrained loading conditions, whilst a constant load for several days may be necessary to allow full dissipation of pore pressures.

2.5.1 Maintained load tests

Based on Fleming et al (1992), the maintained load test requires a careful specification of loading increments and period for which these increments are held constant. The ICE Specification for Piling sets out a suitable minimum scheme, and the ASTM Test Designation D-1143 specifies a similar procedure. In addition, limits are placed on the rate of movement before the next load stage is added. The ICE Specification for Piling limits the rate of movement to 0.25 mm/h provided the rate is decreasing. Some engineers prefer a limit of 0.1 mm/h, and a frequent requirement is to hold the load constant for 24 h at design load.

The maintained load test may be used to test contract piles to check acceptance criteria. Such piles are usually loaded to 100% of the design verification load (DVL) plus 50% of the specified working load to avoid overstressing the soil whilst still proving an adequate reserve of strength in the soil/pile system. On special test piles that will not form part of the permanent works, loading can be increased to failure, enabling a check to be made on the design parameters (usually by the CRP method).

29

2.6 Interpretation of the results

A considerable amount of data may be computed from a pile test, and with more sophisticated instrumentation a greater understanding of the soil/pile interaction may be achieved. It is important that the designer is satisfied that the behavior of an isolated test pile under relatively short-term loading stresses the bearing stratum in a similar manner to the piles in the foundation. Interpretation of the test data may be carried out on several levels:

i. Qualitative inspection of the load settlement curves

ii. A check for compliance with load and deformation specifications

iii. A back analysis of the data to provide information on the soil stiffness and strength criteria

2.6.1 Load settlement curves

Fleming et al (1992) stated that typical shapes of load settlement curves are given by M.J. Tomlinson. In particular unusual load settlement curves should be thoroughly investigated as they may indicate unexpected geological problems, such as soft sensitive clay, defects in the pile shaft, or poor construction techniques. From straightforward pile tests in which the load settlement characteristics of the head of pile are measured, there is as yet no satisfactory published method that allows separation of the components of shaft friction or adhesion and end-bearing with a satisfactory degree of confidence.

30

The ultimate load of a pile is usually not well defined. In practice an exact definition of the ultimate load is not all that important, provided an adequate factor of safety is clearly demonstrated. Two simple criteria which cover most situations are

i. The load at which settlement continues to increase without further increase in load

ii. The load causing a settlement of 10% of the pile diameter (base diameter). The latter limit is likely to give a low estimate of the ultimate load as it is unlikely that general yielding of the soil around the pile will have been initiated.

2.6.3 Settlement criteria

Fleming et al (1992) stated that settlement limits at design load or 1.5 times the design load are frequently specified, on the basis of previous experience. Such specified settlement limits should be realistic and should take into account the likely elastic compression of the pile shaft. It is sometimes difficult to discern how the specified criteria for a single pile relate to the behavior of the pile group.

This data may then be applied to the pile group to estimate the overall performance of the foundation under the design loads. This approach is particularly useful in the case of piled structures carrying high lateral loads, as the stiffness of the soil is difficult to establish and may well be affected by the piling operation.

Contract test piles are frequently loaded to 1½ times the design load as a performance test. Such a load test should avoid serious permanent deformation in the

31

surrounding soil and the significant alteration of the load/deformation characteristics of the pile so tested. As these tests are not taken to failure it is sometimes difficult to assess the acceptability of the pile. In such situations it is useful to estimate the likely elastic settlement of the pile and then to draw up a realistic and unambiguous specification for test pile performance. Such as assessment can quickly be made by summing the compression to estimate the shaft and settlement of the toe. For such calculations it is necessary to estimate the shaft adhesion from the site investigation data. In practice, by making appropriate assumptions, upper and lower limits to the settlement may be established.

2.7

Statnamic test

2.7.1

Introduction

The statnamic load test has been developed to meet the construction industry’s demand for an accurate and cost effective method of determining the load bearing capacity of caissons and high capacity piles. Developed jointly by Berminghammer Corporation of Canada and TNO Building and Construction Research of the Netherlands, statnamic can be used on any pile type with minimum pile preparation. Loading is perfectly axial and relatively slow application and release of compressive forces eliminates tensile stresses, compressing the pile and the soil as a single unit. As a result, static load-displacement behaviour can be obtained.

Today’s taller buildings, heavier loads, and increased construction costs require the use of large-diameter, drilled pier foundations systems. As such, the demand for high capacity piles over 5.0 MN has increased dramatically.

32

Traditionally, static pile loading tests (to failure or twice design load) have been used to verify the geotechnical design parameters, pile load capacity, and, in some cases, the integrity of the pile. However, static pile loading test methods are expensive, time- consuming, and cumbersome. Dynamic load tests have been used, as well as, to predict static capacity and load-displacement behaviour. The dynamic response of a pile, however, is controlled by stress waves; the analysis of which requires highly experienced engineers. Dynamic load testing also creates tensile stresses which can cause pile damage in concrete piles.

Statnamic testing overcomes the practical difficulties of both static loading and dynamic load tests. Statnamic is capable of producing a given force using only 10% of the mass in an equivalent static test. During statnamic loading, a perfectly axial load is applied for duration of 120 milliseconds; long enough to compress the entire pile. Pile behaviour is not dominated by stress wave propagation and pile accelerations are on the order of 1 g. Load duration and loading rate are controlled by the vent height, amount of fuel, and reaction mass.

2.7.2 Development of Statnamic

Statnamic development began in 1988 with a 0.1 MN test device. Today test devices are capable of producing loads up to 30MN. Design and fabrication of bigger devices of 45MN and 60MN are underway and they will be used for testing in the near future.

33

Statnamic load tests have been conducted in Canada, United States, Japan, Germany, Israel, Korea, Malaysia and Singapore. Testing options include single piles, pile groups, structural elements, bridge piers and spread footings.

2.7.3 Basic concept of statnamic

The statnamic device is placed directly atop the test pile. Solid fuel is burned within a pressure chamber, creating a large pressure which derives the reaction mass upward. An equal and opposite force pushes downward on the pile.

If the reaction mass of 30 tonnes is initially accelerated upward at 20 g, then a resultant 600 tonne force acts downward on the foundation. The reaction mass is 1/20 (30 tonnes/600 tonnes = 1/20) or 5% of equivalent statnamic mass. Statnamic loading is applied in a linearly increasing manner and gradual unloading is achieved by a controlled venting of a pressure. The duration of force is on the order of 120 milliseconds.

Pile accelerations of 1g are 100-1000 times less than a conventional dynamic load test. As well, the duration of force is 10 to 20 times greater than a conventional drop hammer blow. Thus, pile behaviour is not dominated by stress wave propagation. A dynamic load test is shock load whereas statnamic load can be compared to a push, subjecting the pile to consistent, high compressive forces throughout the length of the pile.

Statnamic can be described using each of Newton’s three Laws of Motion:

1st Law (Law of Inertia)

34

A body will continue in a state of rest or uniform motion unless compelled to change that state by an external force.

ΣF = 0

In a load test, two external forces act on a pile – the loading force which sets the pile in motion and the pile’s resistance to that motion. Pile resistance is primarily a function of the inertia of the pile mass due to pile stiffness along the pile shaft and the pile toe. By measuring the pile displacement during test loading, a measurement of the pile’s resistance and thus the pile/soil behaviour can be measured.

2nd Law (Law of Acceleration) When acted upon by an external force, a body accelerates in the direction of that external force and is proportional to the magnitude of that force.

F = ma

In static, statnamic, and dynamic load testing, the same net force can be applied to a pile by different means. Compare:

Static: F = M x g = Mg

Statnamic:

Dynamic:

F x

M

20

F x

M

500

x 20g

=

x 500g

Mg

=

Mg

where M is the total mass of static test, M/20 is the reaction of mass (Statnamic) M/500 is the drop hammer mass g is the acceleration due to gravity 20g is the acceleration of the reaction mass (Statnamic) 500g is the acceleration of the drop hammer

35

3rd Law (Action and Reaction)

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

F 12 = F 21

During Statnamic loading, the pressure vessel exerts an upward force on the reaction masses, while an equal and opposite force reacts downward on the pile. Furthermore, since the direction of force is along the cylinder assembly, loading is perfectly axial.

2.7.4 Application of Statnamic test

Statnamic can be used on any pile type or structure: These include barrette piles, micro piles, batter groups, pile groups, caissons, bored piles, precast concrete piles, lateral load test, bridge piers and spread footing.

2.7.5 Statnamic Theory

2.7.5.1 Load Duration

Static Loading

Since velocity and acceleration are near zero throughout a static load test, damping and inertial effects are minimal. However, as the load duration decreases for quick static load tests, results can differ from conventional static tests due to the strain rate-dependent nature of soil. Low permeability soils (soft silty or clayey soils) are most susceptible to quick load rates.

36

Low Rate Dynamic Loading (Statnamic)

The duration of pile loading is on the order of 120 milliseconds. The load duration, while not on the order of static testing, is still relatively long compared to high rate dynamic testing. Dynamic rate effects are present only in low permeability, cohesive soils and can be measured using existing pile/soil models.

High Rate Dynamic Loading (Dynamic Load Tests)

The duration of pile loading is on the order of 4 milliseconds. The short duration of loading introduces stress waves to the pile and will unduly effect pile/soil behaviour. Damping and inertial exert a strong influence on the test result and are difficult to quantify.

2.8 Stress Wave Mechanics

In conventional static loading, the pile compresses as a whole throughout loading and can be considered as a rigid body. As the load duration decreases, however, stress waves are introduced to the pile, effecting pile/soil behaviour. Stress waves propagate along the pile at the speed of sound within the pile.

c

= (E/ρ) 1/2

c

= stress wave velocity

E = pile/soil system modulus

ρ = pile/soil density

37

C is about 3500 to 4000 m/s for reinforced concrete piles and 5000 m/s for steel piles. For long piles (~ 30 meters) an initial stress at the pile top will reach the pile toe in approximately 6 milliseconds, corresponding to the pile’s nature period, (30/5000 =

.006).

Statnamic loading is on the order of 120 milliseconds, well above the natural period of even the stiffest pile. Because stress wave effects are minimized, the pile can be considered as a rigid body and conventional static analytical methods apply. Although results from Statnamic load tests have shown that rate effects are negligible for piles in very stiff soils and piles end-bearing in rock, rate effects for piles in soft soils have been relatively large and have significantly influenced load-displacement behaviour. The Unloading-Point model, as shown in Figure 2.1, is a simple method of analysis for determining the static resistance from a Statnamic test. As well, rate effects present during a Statnamic test can be quantified with the Unloading-Point model.

present during a Statnamic test can be quantified with the Unloading-Point model. Figure 2.1 : The

Figure 2.1 : The Unloading-Point model

38

2.9

Pyrotechnics

To produce the characteristic Statnamic loading (force versus time as shown above), the pressure chamber expands due to the increasing pressure from burning fuel gases. The Statnamic cylinder, located on top of the pressure chamber, is accelerated upward force (and hence the downward Statnamic loading) is equal to the product of this acceleration and the total reaction mass. Thus,

where

F = ma a = C 1 .t

and

C 1 is a constant

The increased volume of the pressure chamber is equal to the product of the displacement of the cylinder (d) and the area of the pressure vessel (A). Thus,

V = A.d = A

V

=

A (C .t

1

3

∫∫

+

a.dt

C .t

2

2

+

C .t

3

Equation 1

where a is integrated twice in Equation 1 to determine d. The rate of increase in pressurized gas production is therefore cubic, characteristic of solid propellant fuel.

The statnamic fuel consists of a number of small, perforated soil pellets. The burn rate depends on several parameters:

1. chemical composition

2. pellet geometry

3. temperature

4. pressure

Chemical composition is chosen from factory burn trials. Perforated cylindrical pellets are preferred to solid pellets or flat plates because they increase in surface area

39

throughout burning desired for statnamic. Furthermore, using many small pellets instead of one large fuel charge reduces a consistent burn and averages out any imperfections in a single pellet. As expected, the natural burn rate increases as temperature and pressure increases in pressure chamber. Under normal operating conditions, burning will not begin until the fuel temperature reaches 1000 o C.

The statnamic propellant can be safely handled and will not ignite under spark, friction, or agitation. When under atmospheric conditions, the burn is slow and easily controlled. The fuel can be extinguished with water. Propellant can be transported with minimum preparation stored for long periods of time without concern.

2.10 Data Acquisition

Load and displacement data are measured at the pile top with a calibrated load cell and laser sensor and analyzed by TNO ‘s Foundation Pile Diagnostic System (FPDS). The load measurements are accurate to within 0.1% and the displacement measurements are accurate to 0.1 mm. A total of 2000 data points are recorded at a sampling rate of 150 microseconds for a total time 0.3 seconds, suitable to record the entire event. The sampling time and total measuring time are variable and can be changed in FPDS. The ignition triggering is also controlled by FPDS.

Load Cell

The statnamic load is measured by a circular load cell, located between the piston and the pile top. A number of strain gauge transducers, mounted on the load cell circumference, reduce the effects if any uneven loading. Loads signal from each transducers are averaged and amplified within the load cell to reduce error and are further amplified by FPDS.

40

Laser Sensor

Pile displacement is measured with photovoltaic laser sensor (located at the center of the piston base) and a remote reference laser source. During the statnamic event, the change in position of the laser sensor is measured relative to the stationary laser source. Any ground motion due to loading occurs after the event and does not effect the reference source, 20 meters away.

Throughout loading, load and displacement signals are digitized and written to a raw data file. After the event, the raw signal voltages are converted to load and displacement values using factory calibration values. Load-displacement graphs are presented immediately on-site. Supplementary graphs, including graphs of velocity and acceleration, are also generated by FPDS. Velocity and acceleration data are to be used for Unloading-Point Analysis to determine static load settlement behaviour.

2.11 Statnamic Assembly

Statnamic assembly is straightforward. All components are handled with a hoisting machine. Reaction masses are sectional and made of concrete, lead, steel and others. Concrete reaction masses can be cast on-site and reused. This can be shown in Figure 2.2 below.

41

41 Figure 2.2 : Statnamic devices assembly

Figure 2.2 : Statnamic devices assembly

42

2.12 The result

The load displacement behavior is almost identical to a static load test. During the entire test, a state-of-the art load cell and laser sensor, built right into the statnamic device, act in concert with a high-speed laptop computer to measure load and displacement directly. During a statnamic test, measured signals from the load cell and laser sensor are digitally recorded by TNO’s Foundation Pile Diagnostic System (FPDS). Over 2000 values of load and displacement are recorded. Load versus displacement results are presented immediately on site, as well as graphs of load, displacement, velocity, and acceleration versus time. Straightforward methods of analysis are provided through user-friendly software to determine the damping and inertial effects. Load-deflection behavior and the ultimate capacity of the foundation are clearly presented to the user.

2.13

Statnamic compared to dynamic and static testing

2.13.1

Dynamic Testing

In dynamic testing, a falling mass strikes the pile, delivering a short duration impulse. Force and velocity are derived from gauges attached to the pile top. In statnamic testing, a controlled, pre-determined load is applied directly to the pile without introducing high-tension forces. The duration of loading is substantially longer than both the impulse produced by dynamic testing and natural frequency of the foundation. The capacity of large-diameter foundations can be fully mobilized without risking damage.

43

Static testing is expensive and cumbersome. On average, setting up and dismantling a satnamic test can be done in a shift without interrupting the piling contractor. Multiple piles can be tested in one day. In a comparative program in Kanazawa, Japan, a static and statnamic test were conducted on the same foundation producing virtually identical load-displacement behaviour. Numerous comparisons on driven and cast in-situ piles have shown similar results.

2.14 Soil Types

In this study, there are two types of rock that need to be taken into account. One is limestone rock and the other is granite rock. Based on Amir (1986), the main descriptive properties of rocks which are of interest to the civil engineer are (AGE 197):

Rock type, stratigraphic unit, hardness and structure.

2.14.1 Elementary rock classification

Rocks are classified into 3 main groups according to the process by which they were formed: Igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic.

a) Igneous rocks

When molten rock, or magma, is forced up to the surface in the form of lava it cools and forms a family of rocks named igneous or magnetic. The specific kind of

44

rock which is created by this process depends on two main factors: The rate of cooling of the magma and its chemical composition

Magma in this case which loses heat inside the ground forms an intrusive, or plutonic, rock. Cooling in this case is very slow, and this enables the growth of relatively large crystals. Extrusive (or volcanic) rocks, on the other hand, solidify on the surface, in a process of a rapid cooling. As a result, the crystal structure is fine or even nonexistent.

Composition:

Acid -------------------------------------------------- Basic

 

Light coloured

Intermediate

Dark

 

coloured

 

Light weight

Heavy

Texture

With quartz

No quartz

Coarse

Granite, Granodiorite Aplite Rhyolite (Felsite)

Syenite, Diorite

Gabbro

Medium

Diabase

Dolerite

Fine

Trachyte, Andesite (Felsite)

Basalt

Mixed

---------------- (Porphyry of the above types) -----------------

Glassy

Obsidian

Basalt-glass

 

Broken

-----------Breccia, Agglomerate, Tuff ------------------------

Table 2.3: Schematic classification of igneous rocks

According to their chemical composition, igneous rocks may range from acidic to basic. Acidic rocks are those that contain mainly silica. They are generally lighter in colour and

45

lighter in weight. Granite is a typical acid rock. Basic rocks, on the other extreme, contain large mounts of metals such as iron and magnesium, and are dark and heavy. Gabbro is a typical basic rock.

(b) Sedimentary rocks

In the process of erosion, rocks weather and are broken down into small particles or even totally dissolved. These detritic particles may be carried away by water, wind or glaciers, and deposited far from their original position. When these sediments start to form thick deposits, they consolidate under their own weight and eventually, in the presence of a suitable cementing chemical, may turn into solid rock. As a result of this process, sedimentary rock will almost invariably possess a distinct stratified, or bedded, structure. The classification of sedimentary rocks (Table 2.4) is based on several factors, mainly grain size, composition and origin.

Certain rock types are named according to their origin. Some examples are Tillite (cemented glacial deposit) and Travertine (carbonaceous hot-spring deposit).

46

Composition

Texture

Rock type

Remarks

Detritic

Coarse

Conglomerate Rounded Breccia

particles Angular particles

(above 50%

transported

particles)

Medium Fine(>2 microns) Very fine (<2 microns)

Sandstone

Sandstone

Shale

Little or no cement Cemented by CaCO 3

Marl

Chemical

Sandy (5% - 50% transported material)

Flint

SiO2, dark

(below 50%

Chert

SiO2, light

transported

Limestone

mainly CaCO3

material)

Dolomite

CaMg(CO3)2

 

Chalk

microscopic

 

skeletons

 

Phosphate

of CaCO 3

 

Pure

Gypsum

(<5%

Coal

transported

Rock salt

material)

Iron

Table 2.4 : Schematic classification of sedimentary rocks

47

2.14.2 Stratigraphy

The determination of the stratigraphic unit to which a rock belongs will normally be undertaken by a qualified geologist. It can often be helpful in conveying to the reader of a geological report special characteristic of this specific rock, and give an indication as to other rock types which may present in the immediate vicinity.

2.14.2 Hardness

The hardness of fresh rock is mainly a function of its mineral composition and forming process. At a later stage, rock can be modified by weathering processes to such degree that we may want find ourselves regarding it as soil. Field hardness, defined as the resistance to indentation or scratching, can be correlated with the strength of the rock material, which is of much interest to the engineer. Such as correlation (Table 4) enables useful conclusions to be drawn from simple field tests.

48

2.14.3 Defects in rock

(a)

Discontinuities

Based on Amir (1986), large rock masses are almost never continuous. Since it is reasonable to assume that the strength of rock mass is determined by its discontinuities, their study is utmost importance to the engineer. Discontinuities may take the form of major features such as faults, shear zones and dykes, or small-scale features resulting from the process which formed the rock (bedding planes) or from tectonic action (joints). In many cases joints may be concentrated in well-defined directions, thus forming joint sets which can be analyzed statistically. The following characteristics of discontinuities are of main concern to the civil engineer.

a) Dip and dip direction. These values help to establish the existence (or absence) of joint sets. Dip angle may also have a bearing on the load- carrying behaviour of piles: Horizontal or nearly horizontal open joints will influence the performance of piles more than vertical ones with similar characteristics.

b) Frequency, or spacing between adjacent discontinuities. Jointing is defined as very widely spaced for a typical spacing of more than 1 m, and very close when joint frequency comes down to between 10 and 30 mm. when bedding planes are less than 10 mm apart, the term ‘intensely laminated’ or ‘intensely foliated’ may be applicable.

c) Opening – ranging from very narrow for wall separation of less than 0.1 mm, to very wide if the width exceeds 5 mm.

d) Gouge or infilling – its existence or absence should be noted. Gouge is often in the form of soil, and has to be described as such, including information regarding its moisture content and consistency.

49

e) Roughness of joint surfaces – rough joints are capable of sustaining high shear stresses, while the shear strength of smooth and polish joints is only nominal.

f) Waviness or curvature of the surfaces of the discontinuities.

A meaningful description of a rock mass must, therefore, cover the above parameters as extensively as possible to enable us to reach a reasonable evaluation of its engineering properties.

2.14.4 Uniaxial compressive strength

The uniaxial compression test (ISRM 1972) is performed on intact cylinders, with a diameter exceeding 54mm and a length-to-diameter ratio of 2.5 to 3, at their natural moisture content. An axial compressive load is applied and continuously increased until failure is reached after 5 to 15 minutes. The maximum load, divided by the cross-sectional area of the sample, is defined as the uniaxial compressive strength q u . The uniaxial compressive strength, or UCS, is an important index property of the rock material, and some typical values are presented in Table 5.

Certain rock types, such as marls and some chalks, may be sensitive to water. The strength of such rocks will drop considerably upon wetting, especially under unconfined conditions.

50

2.14.5 Rock mass classification

Based on Amir (1986), the large number of factors which determine the mechanical properties of rock masses creates certain whenever these properties have to be incorporated in a design process. Since it would be convenient if we could express these properties by a single numerical value, various classification systems have been proposed for rock masses. Following is the short list of some better known systems.

The Rock Quality Designation (RQD), which is widely used as the ratio of the total length of core which was recovered in intact pieces 100mm or more in length, to the length of a given run, expressed as a percentage. The correlation between RQD and descriptive rock quality is presented in Table 2.5.

RQD (%)

Rock quality

<25

very poor

25

– 50

poor

50

– 75

fair

75

– 90

good

90

– 100

very good

Table 2.5. Rock quality

The CSIR and the NGI classification systems developed specifically for tunneling, take into account not only the RQD but also intact rock strength, joint orientation and condition, ground water influence. So far, these systems have not found any use in piling.

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

In this project there are two types of data that have been collected. One is the data for maintained load test and one is from the statnamic load test. In this chapter, data from statnamic load test will be discussed thoroughly than the maintained load test procedure, as it is the most common test done for pile. For both type of tests, there are several data need to be collected that are the bore log record for each pile, the piling record and the test record. This record will be evaluated to compare the result for both maintained load test and statnamic load test.

3.1 Statnamic Test.

The main principle of statnamic load testing is based on launching reaction masses from a pile top by releasing high pressure gases from a cylinder. The reaction force required to launch the reaction masses upward acts equally downward on the pile, and drives the pile into the ground. The high pressure gases are produced by the burning solid fuel within the cylinder assembly.

53

Using Newton’s second law of acceleration, the reaction masses are accelerated upward at 20g where a force acts downwards onto the pile will be 20 times the reaction masses weight. Thus, only 5% of the required test load is required for the reaction masses assembly. Loading of the pile is monitored using a calibrated load cell and displacement is monitored using a photo voltaic cell laser sensor. All data recorded are digitized and stored in a portable computer connected to the assembly.

The duration of a statnamic load testing is in the order of 120 to 150 millisecond. This produces a dynamic load on the pile top which is enough to allow the pile react as a rigid body without the influence of stress wave propagation within the pile. The soil is in turn loaded with minimum inertial effects and damping. However, in highly viscoelastic soils, some rate effects are inevitable and influence the interpretation of the test response.

3.2 Assembly of Statnamic test equipment.

Below are the procedures on assembling the statnamic test equipment. The procedures are shown through photographs.

54

54 Figure 1 : Installation of piston and oil application Figure 2: Piston and oil installation

Figure 1 : Installation of piston and oil application

54 Figure 1 : Installation of piston and oil application Figure 2: Piston and oil installation

Figure 2: Piston and oil installation

55

55 Figure 3: Ignition System Figure 4 Fuel Cage

Figure 3: Ignition System

55 Figure 3: Ignition System Figure 4 Fuel Cage

Figure 4 Fuel Cage

56

56 Figure 5:Loading of Statnamic fuel Figure 6: Closing of the piston

Figure 5:Loading of Statnamic fuel

56 Figure 5:Loading of Statnamic fuel Figure 6: Closing of the piston

Figure 6: Closing of the piston

57

57 Figure 7: Installation of base plate Figure 8: Installation of cylinder

Figure 7: Installation of base plate

57 Figure 7: Installation of base plate Figure 8: Installation of cylinder

Figure 8: Installation of cylinder

58

58 Figure 9: Installation of cylinder Figure 10: Installation of weight

Figure 9: Installation of cylinder

58 Figure 9: Installation of cylinder Figure 10: Installation of weight

Figure 10: Installation of weight

59

59 Figure 11: Installation of weight Figure 12: Installation of weight

Figure 11: Installation of weight

59 Figure 11: Installation of weight Figure 12: Installation of weight

Figure 12: Installation of weight

60

60 Figure 13: After installation of weight mass Figure 14: Placing the gravel structure non-supporting panels

Figure 13: After installation of weight mass

60 Figure 13: After installation of weight mass Figure 14: Placing the gravel structure non-supporting panels

Figure 14: Placing the gravel structure non-supporting panels

61

61 Figure 15: Closing of the structure panels and installation of gravel Figure 16: Portable computer

Figure 15: Closing of the structure panels and installation of gravel

Figure 15: Closing of the structure panels and installation of gravel Figure 16: Portable computer and

Figure 16: Portable computer and data logging device

62

62 Figure 17: cell laser source Figure 18: After testing

Figure 17: cell laser source

62 Figure 17: cell laser source Figure 18: After testing

Figure 18: After testing

63

3.3 Data Acquisition

The data for analysis are obtained from two sites. The data for bored pile cast on limestone rock is collected from a housing project in Sentul, Kuala Lumpur. The project is conducted by Syarikat Pembenaan Yeoh Tiong Lay Sdn Bhd where the piling contractor is Geopancar Sdn. Bhd. The statnamic test was conducted on a bored pile size 750mm diameter and the maintained load test was conducted on a bored pile size 1050mm. The depth of the bored pile for statnamic test is 17.5m and the depth of the bored pile for maintained load test is 16.6m. The statnamic test was done on 2/6/2004 while the maintained load test was done on 4/1/2004 to 6/1/2004. All record of each bored pile can be seen in Appendix 1.

The data for bored pile cast on granite rock is collected from a new highway project in Bayan Baru, Pulau Pinang. This is a Jabatan Kerja Raya project where the main contractor is Seri Meraga Sdn Bhd and the piling contractor is BAUER (M) Sdn. Bhd. The depth of the bored pile for statnamic test is 35.4m and the depth of the bored pile for maintained load test is 60.1m. The statnamic test was conducted on a bored pile size 1800mm diameter on 17/4/2005 and the maintained load test was conducted on a bored pile size 1200mm diameter on 5/6/2001. All record for each bored pile can be seen in Appendix 2.

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS

Once all tests finish, all data transferred into Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for analysis. Data from the statnamic test is analyzed using 3 methods of calculation that are the Unloading Point method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method. The analyses are shown below.

4.1 Interpretation of Statnamic pile load test results

The establish procedure for the evaluation of statnamic pile load-deflection response is based on a simplified pile and soil model that is subjected to a rigid body translation during the loading and unloading stages. Stress wave propagation within the pile is minimized. The pile is treated as a rigid mass with elastic properties. The soil is modeled as a spring and dashpot system in parallel. The spring represents the static soil resistance, while the dashpot represents the damping of the soil. This can be shown in Figure 4.1 below.

65

65 Figure 4.1 : Modelling of pile and soil during statnamic loading The response of a

Figure 4.1 : Modelling of pile and soil during statnamic loading

The response of a pile to a statnamic loading can be mathematically described by the following equation:

F stn (t) = F u (t) + F v (v) +F a (t)

-- Eq 1

where Fstn (t) is the statnamic applied load, F u (t) is the term accounting for the static soil resistance, F v (t) is the term accounting for the effect of damping, and F a (t) accounting for the effect of inertia during the loading/unloading stage.

The three components can be represented by:

Fu (t) = K u(t) Fv (t) = C v(t) Fa (t) = M a(t)

--- Eq 2

where u (t) is the pile top displacement and v (t) is the velocity at the pile top, a(t) is the acceleration at the pile top, M is the mass of pile, K is the total spring stiffness, and C is the damping component of the pile-soil system.

66

Substituting Eq. (2) into Eq (1) yields

Fstn (t) = Ku (t) + Cv (t) +M a (t)

-- Eq 3

Alternatively, Eq.(3) can be written as

Fstn (t) = Fsoil (t) + Ma (t)

--- Eq 4

Where

Fsoil(t) = Ku(t) + Cv (t)

-- Eq 5

In a pile load test, u(t), v(t) and a(t) are measured together with Fstn(t) at any time, t. The mass, M of pile can easily be calculated. The value of K and C are to be determined, and thus the components of Fu (t) and Fv (t) can then be obtained.

There are currently four methods of interpretation of pile response by statnamic pile load test, namely, Initial Stiffness method, Equilibrium Point method, Matsumoto (1994) method (or Modified Initial Stiffness method) and Unloading Point method (Kusakabe and Matsumoto, 1995). The Unloading Point method and Matsumoto method are the improved version of the Equilibrium Point method and Initial Stiffness method respectively. Hence, only the Unloading Point method and Matsumoto method will be used in this study. Also, a new method developed at the National University of Singapore, called the Simultaneous Equation method, will also be used in this study for the comparison of the results.

67

4.1.2 Unloading Point Method (Kusakabe and Matsumoto, 1995)

This is a modification of the Equilibrium Point method. This method assumes that damping is linear, i.e. the damping coefficient C is constant through out the test.

In the Unloading Point method, Fsoil is calculated from

F soil (t) = F stn (t) – M a (t)

-- Eq 6

The point of maximum displacement on the Fsoil versus u curve is called the “Unloading Point”, which corresponds to the point when velocity is zero (v=0). Since this zero velocity point is unique, it also corresponds to the point of maximum displacement of the F stn versus u curve.

At this unloading point, the damping force Fv (tu) = 0, where tu is the time at the Unloading Point. Thus, at the Unloading Point

Fsoil (tu) = F u (tu) = F stn (tu) – Ma (tu)

-- Eq 7

This value of Fu (tu) corresponding to the Unloading Point is taken to be the maximum static soil resistance, Fu(max) obtained in the Statnamic test.

The damping factor C is estimated from

C = [Fsoil (max) – Fu (max)] V*

-- Eq 8

Where Fsoil (max) is the maximum value of Fsoil determined from the Fsoil versus u curve, and v* is the pile velocity at Fsoil (max).

68

The complete static load-deflection curve can then be obtained by using this value of C and calculating the static load Fu(t) as follows:

Fu(t) = Fstn – Cv(t) – Ma(t)

4.1.2 Matsumoto (1994) Method

-- Eq 9

This is a modification of the Initial Stiffness method. In this method, both the spring and damping factors (K and C in Eq. 3) are assumed to vary during the load/unloading stage.

The static tangent stiffness, k (i) is determined from

k(i) = Fu (i) – Fu (i-1) u(i) – u(i-1)

The initial value of k (1) is estimated from

k (1) = Fstat (1) / u (1)

-- Eq 10

-- Eq 11

where F stat (1) is the static resistance at the start of the test (t=0), which is equal to the weight of the reaction mass, and u (1) is the initial displacement.

For the (i+1)th time step

k(i+1) = k(i)

-- Eq 12

69

The damping coefficient can be calculated from

C(i+1) = { Fstn(i+1) – Fu(i+1) – Ma(i+1) } / v(i+1)

-- Eq 14

At the (i+2)th time step, the following equations are solved:

C(i+2) = C(i+1)

Fu(i+2) = Fstn(i+2) – C(i+2) v(i+1) – M a(i+2)

k(i+2) = Fu(i+2) – Fu(i+1) u(i+2) – u(i+1)

-- Eq 15

-- Eq 16

-- Eq 17

The F u versus u curve can be constructed by iterative use of Eqs. 12 to 17. The values of k and C are successively updated as the calculations proceed.

4.1.3 Simultaneous Equation method

This is further modification of the Matsumoto method of which at any one time-step there are 2 unknowns, k (tangent stiffness) and C. hence, by assuming that the values of k and C remain constant at time i+1 and i+2 and writing the equilibrium equations at these two time steps, there will be 2 unknowns in 2 equations. The static soil resistance can be written as

F u (i+1) = F u (i) + k {u(i+1) – u(i)}

-- Eq 18

70

The 2 equilibrium equations can be written as

Fstn (i+1) = Ma(i+1) + Cv(i+1) + Fu(i) + k { u(i+) – u(i) }

-- Eq 19

Fstn (i+2) = Ma(i+2) + Cv(i+2) + Fu(i) + k { u(i+2) – u(i) }

Solving the above simultaneous equations at any 2-time steps enables the determination of k and C.

4.2 Interpretation of Maintained Load Test data.

From all data gained from the maintained load test, a load versus settlement is plotted and is compared to the analysis from the statnamic test. All data from the statnamic test and maintained load test is normalized to produce data that can be compare together. From the graph produced by the maintained load test data and statnamic test, a comparison on the effective method will be discussed.

CHAPTER 5

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In this chapter, all results will be shown and conclusion will be made. For this project, data was collected from two different sites ad area. One was taken from a project on a limestone area and one comes from a granite area. The results will be discussed in the following part of this chapter.

5.1 Results for Bored Pile on Limestone Rock

This data was taken from an apartment project conducted by Syarikat Pembenaan Yeoh Tiong Lay Sdn. Bhd. in Sentul, Kuala Lumpur. The bored pile was bored by Geopancar Sdn. Bhd. The bored pile size for maintained load test was 1050mm diameter and the bored pile for statnamic test was 900mm diameter. The calculation for the three methods for statnamic test can be seen on Appendix 3, Appendix 4 and Appendix 5. For maintained load test result, the calculation can be seen on Appendix 6. All data from

72

both test is normalized by dividing the capacity of the pile to the pile size. This is needed to compare the two tests without much doubt. The summary for the ultimate capacity of the pile achieved and the maximum settlement obtained for the two tests is presented in Table 5.1

Ultimate Capacity (Tonnes/m)

Test

Settlement (mm)

Statnamic Test:

Unloading Point Method Statnamic Test:

Matsumoto Method Statnamic Test:

Simultaneous Equation Method Maintained Load Test

884.01

8.20

909.93

8.20

955.95

8.2

1571.41

13.17

Table 5.1 Results for the statnamic test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on limestone rock

The residual settlement for statnamic test is 2.18mm and the residual settlement for maintained load test is 0.36mm. Below are the results for the statnamic test and maintained load test presented in charts.

73

Load (Tonnes) versus Displacement (mm)

Load (Tonnes)

-1.00 -100.00 0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 700.00 800.00 900.00 0.00 1.00 2.00
-1.00
-100.00
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
900.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
Displacement (mm)
unloading point method

unloading point method

Figure 5.1: Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Limestone rock

74

Load (Tonnes) versus Displacement (mm)

Load (Tonnes)

-1.00 -100.00 0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 700.00 800.00 900.00 0.00 1.00 2.00
-1.00
-100.00
0.00
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
600.00
700.00
800.00
900.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
matsumoto method
Displacement (mm)

Figure 5.2: Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Limestone rock

75

Load (Tonnes) versus Displacement (mm)

Load (Tonnes)

-1.00 -100.000 0.000 100.000 200.000 300.000 400.000 500.000 600.000 700.000 800.000 900.000 1000.000 0.00
-1.00
-100.000
0.000
100.000
200.000
300.000
400.000
500.000
600.000
700.000
800.000
900.000
1000.000
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
Displacement (mm)
simultaneous equation

simultaneous equation

Figure 5.3: Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Limestone rock

76

Load (Tonnes/m) versus Settlement (mm)

Load (Tonnes/m)

0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 1400.00 1600.00 1800.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00
0.00
200.00
400.00
600.00
800.00
1000.00
1200.00
1400.00
1600.00
1800.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
1st cycle
2nd cycle
3rd cycle
Settlement (mm)

Figure 5.4: Results for maintained load test for Limestone rock

77

Load (Tonnes/m) versus Settlement (mm)

Load (Tonnes/m)

-2.00 0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 1400.00 1600.00 1800.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00
-2.00
0.00
200.00
400.00
600.00
800.00
1000.00
1200.00
1400.00
1600.00
1800.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
MLT Maple
unloading point method
simultaneous equation
Matsumoto method
Settlement (mm)

Figure 5.5: Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (3 rd cycle) for Limestone rock

78

5.2 Results for Bored Pile on Granite Rock

This data was taken from a highway project conducted by Jabatan Kerja Raya Pulau Pinang. The main contractor is Sri Meraga Sdn Bhd and the bored pile was piled by BAUER (M) Sdn. Bhd. The bored pile size for maintained load test was 1200mm diameter and the bored pile for statnamic test was 1800mm diameter. The calculation for the three methods for statnamic test can be seen on Appendix 7, Appendix 8 and Appendix 9. For maintained load test result, the calculation can be seen on Appendix 10. All data from both test is normalized by dividing the capacity of the pile to the pile size. This is needed to compare the two tests without much doubt. The summary for the ultimate capacity of the pile achieved and the maximum settlement obtained for the two tests is presented in Table 5.2

Ultimate Capacity (Tonnes/m)

Test

Settlement (mm)

Statnamic Test:

Unloading Point Method Statnamic Test:

Matsumoto Method Statnamic Test:

Simultaneous Equation Method Maintained Load Test

1520.20

8.64

1533.35

8.64

1528.62

8.64

2540.00

133.45

Table 5.2 Results for the statnamic test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on granite rock

79

The residual settlement for statnamic test is 2.75mm and the residual settlement for maintained load test is 97.10mm. Below are the results for the statnamic test and maintained load test presented in charts.

80

Load (Tonnes/m) versus Displacement (mm)

Load (Tonnes/m)

-1.00 -100.00 100.00 300.00 500.00 700.00 900.00 1100.00 1300.00 1500.00 1700.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00
-1.00
-100.00
100.00
300.00
500.00
700.00
900.00
1100.00
1300.00
1500.00
1700.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
Displacement (mm)
unloading point method

unloading point method

Figure 5.6: Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Granite rock

81

Load (Tonnes/m) versus Displacement (mm)

Load (Tonnes/m)

-1.00 -350.00 150.00 650.00 1150.00 1650.00 2150.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
-1.00
-350.00
150.00
650.00
1150.00
1650.00
2150.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
matsumoto method
Displacement (mm)

Figure 5.7: Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Granite rock

82

Load (Tonnes/m) versus Displacement (mm)

Load (Tonnes/m)

-1.00 -300.00 200.00 700.00 1200.00 1700.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00
-1.00
-300.00
200.00
700.00
1200.00
1700.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
Displacement (mm)
simultaneous equation method

simultaneous equation method

Figure 5.8: Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Granite rock

83

Load (Tonnes/m) versus Displacement (mm)

Load (Tonnes/m)

-20.00 0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00
-20.00
0.00
500.00
1000.00
1500.00
2000.00
2500.00
3000.00
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
160.00
1st cycle
2nd cycle
Displacement (mm)

Figure 5.9: Results for maintained load test for Granite rock

84

Load (Tonnes/m) versus Settlement (mm)

Load (Tonnes/m)

-20.00 -200.00 300.00 800.00 1300.00 1800.00 2300.00 2800.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00
-20.00
-200.00
300.00
800.00
1300.00
1800.00
2300.00
2800.00
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
160.00
MLT data
unloading point method
simultaneous equation method
matsumoto method
Settlement (mm)

Figure 5.10: Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (2 nd cycle) for Granite rock

5.3

Conclusions

From the calculation and data for both types of soils, several conclusions can be made. The static load-settlement curves obtained from the results of the statnamic test using the Unloading Point method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method are shown in Figure 5.5 and Figure 5.10.

For bored pile cast on limestone rock, it can be said that all three methods, in spite of the differences in the calculation of the damping coefficient C, give load settlement curves which are very similar. In Figure 5.5, it can be shown that the curves for the three methods compare favorably with the maintained load test curves. Therefore, it can be said that the Unloading Point method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method can be used to compare the statnamic test result with the maintained load test result.

For bored pile cast on granite rock, it can be said that the statnamic test result obtained from the three methods of calculation does not gives a good comparison o the maintained load test result. Although the loading is high but the settlement in the maintained load test is too high and does not give a logic comparison to the result from the statnamic load test. This result happen might be due to the large difference in the depth of bored pile for each test. From Figure 5.10, it can be said that the result is not compared favorably. Thus, it can be concluded that for this type of soil for this project, the data from the statnamic test can not be compared to the maintained load test result.

Although the statnamic test is new, there are several advantages of using this test than the ordinary maintained load test such as the statnamic test applies loads up to 30 MN and higher. The statnamic test can also be tested on high capacity bored piles,

72

barrette piles, steel piles, augercast piles, timber piles, batter piles, in clay, silt, rock and sand. This includes test on bridge foundations, pile groups, spread footings, and off- shore piles. Statnamic can also be tested laterally and without planning. Another advantages of statnamic is that no reaction piles are required and this will save a lot of money in bored piling. Several statnamic test can be conducted for the cost of a single static test. Other than that, statnamic’s built-in load cell and laser sensor provide direct measurements of load-displacement behaviour and it produces load-displacement results immediately on site.

But there are several limitations on the statnamic test. The main limitation is that this test produces only 1 cycle load and though the test is very short, it does not represent the actual settlement of the pile. The pile tested does not gives the actual settlement because the settlement happen only due to several second of loading not like the actual reaction where settlement takes a very long time to happen. Although the statnamic is said to be cheap to be done on several pile but the cost of transportation of the massive thing is quite expensive if the test need to be done in a remote area project. Another limitations of statnamic is that for testing purposes, the analysis of statnamic load testing signals is based on the Unloading Point method. This method assumed that the pile can be modeled as a concentrated mass and springs. Modeling of the pile as a concentrated mass and springs is only valid when stress waves phenomena are of minimal. Deviations can occur with Unloading Point method when the following phenomena are present and not taken into account.

a) Soils in which excessive pore water pressures are generated during statnamic loading.

b) Soils with significant strain rate sensitive behaviour.

73

Therefore, it can be concluded that the outcome of the statnamic test does not produce identical result as the ordinary maintained load test. But, a thorough study should be made in order to determined the differences of the results from the statnamic test and maintained load test before it can be used in our construction industry.

REFERENCES

Amir, Joram M (1986) “Piling in Rock” A.A.Balkema

Chow, Y K and Chew, S H (1997) “Geotechnical Analysis of Statnamic Pile Load Test

on Bored Pile No W47/5 For The Proposed Ampang Kuala Lumpur Elevated

Highway”

Fleming et al (1992) “Piling Engineering” 2 nd Edition, Chapman & Hall

Geonamics (1998) “Statnamic – Load Testing Technology” Economy Express Printing

Goble G.G (1975) “Bearing Capacity of piles from dynamic measurements: Final

report” Ohio Department of Transportation

Housel, William (1966) “Pile Load Capacity: Estimates and Test Results” Journal of

The Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division

Kirkaldie, Louise (1988) “Rock Classification Systems for Engineering Purposes”

Symposium on Rock Classification Systems for Engineering Purposes 1987, ASTM

special technical publication

Peck et al (1974) “Foundation Engineering” 2 nd Edition, Wiley International

Smith, G.N and Smith, G.N (2000) “Elements of Soil Mechanics” 2 nd Edition, Blackwell Science

APPENDIX 3

                           

Normalised

No

Time (ms)

Load

(MN)

Displacement

(mm)

Velocity

(m/s)

Acceleration

(m/s2)

M

M a(t)

C

Cv

Fu(t)

MN to kN

kN to Ton

Ton to

Tonnes

data

(Tonnes/m)

1

0.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.06

0.00186

0.00

1.10

0.000

0.45

450.11

45.17

45.90

51.00

2

1.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.05

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.09

45.17

45.89

50.99

3

2.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.05

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.09

45.17

45.89

50.99

4

3.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.05

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.09

45.17

45.89

50.99

5

4.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.06

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.11

45.17

45.90

51.00

6

5.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.08

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.15

45.18

45.90

51.00

7

6.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.09

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.17

45.18

45.90

51.00

8

7.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.11

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.20

45.18

45.91

51.01

9

8.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.12

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.22

45.18

45.91

51.01

10

9.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.12

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.22

45.18

45.91

51.01

11

10.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.13

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.24

45.19

45.91

51.01

12

11.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.12

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.32

45.29

46.02

51.13

13

12.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.10

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.29

45.29

46.02

51.13

14

13.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.08

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.15

45.18

45.90

51.00

15

14.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.07

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.13

45.18

45.90

51.00

16

15.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.05

 

0.00

 

0.000

0.45

450.09

45.17

45.89

50.99

17

16.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.03

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.16

45.28

46.00

51.11

18

17.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.04

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.17

45.28

46.00

51.12

19

18.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.03

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.16

45.28

46.00

51.11

20

19.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

-0.01

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.12

45.27

46.00

51.11

21

20.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.02

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.06

45.27

45.99

51.10

22

21.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.04

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

451.03

45.26

45.99

51.10

23

22.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.07

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

450.97

45.26

45.98

51.09

24

23.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.13

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

450.86

45.25

45.97

51.08

25

24.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.20

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

450.73

45.24

45.96

51.07

26

25.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.28

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

450.58

45.22

45.94

51.05

27

26.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.37

 

0.00

 

-0.001

0.45

450.41

45.20

45.93

51.03

28

27.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.49

0.00

-0.001

0.45

450.19

45.18

45.90

51.00

29

28.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.62

0.00

-0.001

0.45

449.95

45.16

45.88

50.98

30

29.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.76

0.00

-0.001

0.45

449.69

45.13

45.85

50.95

31

30.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

0.89

0.00

-0.001

0.45

449.45

45.11

45.83

50.92

32

31.00

0.45

0.00

0.00

1.02

0.00

-0.001

0.45

449.21

45.08

45.80

50.89

33

32.00

</